The Credibility Conundrum: Can Social Media Companies Define Credibility for Users?
Authors: Hussain S. Lalani, Christine Laine
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2023)

Ideas and Opinions7 March 2023The Credibility Conundrum: Can Social Media Companies Define Credibility for Users?Hussain S. Lalani, MD, MPH and Christine Laine, MD, MPHHussain S. Lalani, MD, MPHProgram on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (H.S.L.)Search for more papers by this author and Christine Laine, MD, MPHEditor in Chief, Annals of Internal Medicine, Senior Vice President, American College of Physicians, and Professor of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (C.L.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/M23-0490 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail When one of us (C.L.) asked a 70-year-old woman why she declined COVID-19 vaccination, the woman responded, “Fertility.” She lived with her daughter and wanted grandchildren. A “friend who reads a lot” told her that vaccinated people emanate particles that affect the fertility of those around them. This woman fell victim to misinformation (false information spread without harmful intent) shared by her friend, whom she viewed as a more credible source than clinicians who urged vaccination. In contrast, others are exposed to disinformation (false information spread with ill intent).Whom people trust depends on many factors, including life experience, education, ...References1. Dixon S. Daily time spent on social networking by internet users worldwide from 2012 to 2022. Statista. 22 August 2022. Accessed at www.statista.com/statistics/433871/daily-social-media-usage-worldwide on 15 February 2023. Google Scholar2. Kington RS, Arnesen S, Chou WS, et al. Identifying credible sources of health information in social media: principles and attributes. NAM Perspect. 2021;2021. [PMID: 34611600] doi:10.31478/202107a CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Council of Medical Specialty Societies; National Academy of Medicine; World Health Organization. Summary: identifying credible sources of health information in social media: phase 2: considerations for non-accredited nonprofit organizations, for-profit entities, and individual sources. 2022. Accessed at https://cmss.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/CMSS-NAM-WHO-Identifying-Credible-Sources_Executive-Summary_Fnl_10.7.2022.pdf on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar4. Get info on health-related content - YouTube help. Google. Accessed at https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9795167#zippy= on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar5. 2021 Trusted Messengers Study. Ad Council. 2021. Accessed at www.adcouncil.org/learn-with-us/ad-council-research-institute/2021-trusted-messengers-study/full-report-form on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar6. 2022 Trusted Messengers Study. Ad Council. 2022. Accessed at www.adcouncil.org/learn-with-us/ad-council-research-institute/2022-trusted-messengers-study on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar7. Meta net ad revenues worldwide, by segment, 2020-2024. Hootsuite. 2022. Accessed at https://blog.hootsuite.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/facebook-statistics-4.png on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar8. Wakabayashi D. Legal shield for social media is targeted by lawmakers. New York Times. 28 May 2020. Updated 15 December 2020. Accessed at www.nytimes.com/2020/05/28/business/section-230-internet-speech.html on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar9. Neschke S, Draper D, Long S, et al. Gonzalez v. Google: implications for the internet's future. Bipartisan Policy Center. 29 November 2022. Accessed at https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/gonzalez-v-google on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar10. Gonzalez v. Google and the fate of Section 230. Brookings. 14 February 2023. Accessed at www.brookings.edu/events/gonzalez-v-google-and-the-fate-of-section-230 on 17 February 2023. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Program on Regulation, Therapeutics, and Law, Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts (H.S.L.)Editor in Chief, Annals of Internal Medicine, Senior Vice President, American College of Physicians, and Professor of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (C.L.)Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-0490.Corresponding Author: Christine Laine, MD, MPH, Editor in Chief, Annals of Internal Medicine, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106; e-mail, [email protected]org.Author Contributions: Conception and design: H.S. Lalani.Analysis and interpretation of the data: H.S. Lalani.Drafting of the article: H.S. Lalani.Critical revision for important intellectual content: H.S. Lalani.Final approval of the article: C. Laine, H.S. Lalani.Administrative, technical, or logistic support: H.S. Lalani.Collection and assembly of data: H.S. Lalani.This article was published at Annals.org on 7 March 2023. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics LatestKeywordsCOVID-19 ePublished: 7 March 2023 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2023 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...